IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE
BETWEEN:
AND :
DATED THIS THE 315T DAY OF AUGUST, 20::,O"-R,,
BEFORE A A A
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAWAD RAk:fIMV'_R~», H
MFA NO. 14533 OE2O07{M\z) .; A
SRI RAVINATH,
AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS,"-._
S/O HANUMANTH RAO,
RESIDING AT KOT1fANA,HAi;L_I'VILLAGE,
MAL:..ASANDARAAA.,I?--OS"r,
TUMKUR TALUK, '
TUMKUR~¢DIST ' A
, , APPELLANT
(BY SRI i_MUSH_TAQ.AH.MED, AD'J.")""'
1...TS-YED~T,SIDI::IOUE,,'----I
AG ED'AB.QUT 5S"*=.<EA.RS,
AS/O SYED.'V'HYD.ERA,__ "
'R.ESIDIN5 AIf-- NOA«,.13;
NEW, BAME-_UBAZA~R,
CANTONMENT,'
_{?»'\l§FGAL(3RE._.,--A'51
I ._2.»_O'R.'1'ENT--AL INSURANCE CO.,
' vv.,l\i'Q,'20',-,1" FLOOR,
100::I=EET ROAD,
,3~AL.A..HALLI CROSS,
., 'CHIKKA SANDRA,
A "(BY SRI B.S.UMESH, ADv., FOR R2)
*BANGALORE - 57
REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGER
...RESPONDENTS
>k>I<*
K
THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST
THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 09~11-2006, PASSED
IN MVC NO.576/1999 ON THE FILE OF THE 15"' ADDITIONAL
SESSIONS (FAST TRACK) AND MACT, TuIvIi<uRV,V VPARTLY
ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSA'TION–_AND
SEEKING ENHANCEMENT FOR COMPENSATION.f"~–._,[~….: ~ ..
THIS APPEAL Is COMING ON FOR HE.A.R'ING7–l.ON
DAY,THE COURT DELIVERED THE FO'i_»L.QW}';N(3_;~"~..
JL§DGMEAN1_f'5
Dissatisfied claimant is in_4_i:a'ppe-ayl aga'instV..the.?Judgment
and award in MVC No.w.§.?6/i_9S§_9;'.datged"O9~11-2006 on the
file of learned I..Addl.Zsessions_;i,ldg'e,V':'Fa'st Track Court &
MACT, Tumkuir,
2;. "" 'ADipea'l:3:iVs'posted foif"fi'nal hearing. Heard.
"appelialntslodged a claim petition under
Section 1166 or. Karnataka Motor Vehicle Act, seeking
:coFafIpen':satEon«..for pecuniary and non–pecuniary losses due to
siirffered by him in motor vehicle accident
involving" lorry bearing registration No. KA-16/1161, owned
bythe respondent No.1 and insured with respondent No.2.
F._'H.iV's"main plea was that driver of the lorry was driving it in a
-rash and negligent manner, consequent to which he suffered
injuries while he was on Tumkur Road on 22~O6~1999. Due
to the impact of collision he suffered fracture of TLS AP iatu
L. #, )<~ray report reveal fracture of pelvic.
4. The claimant sought compensationjin”Elf
Rs.1,50,000/~ on the ground that despite.ateteiatmentAhaheftiu
was not property united and hasjnow’:4suffe’;=e’d_’_Vé3Q0/o
disability for whole body. The claVi’m”‘was
respondents. But the Tribuna.l_”%’ai_ioweci-the claim partly
awarding Rs.90,800/Qyas Claimant is not
sausfied.
5. learned Member
of the has-“suffered fracture of back
bone and “p_ei\/ic”bone,:ybu.t’:”a’w’arded a sum of Rs.16,000/–
towards plaind and Rs.10,000/~ towards medical
expenses’ and lRs.«6.4.8’O0/– towards loss of future income
withouutv._awai¢din.g any amount towards incidental expenses,
io:~:s”*of anuénities and loss of income during the period of
treatnient. The award needs reconsideration.
:6. As it is not in dispute that claimant has suffered
_,f_t.»:§cture of bones of the body and as per the evidence of the
doctor, who treated the claimant from 2205-1999, he had
i
come to the hospital with the history of road traffic accident
on the same day. On examination the doctor found__ there
was fracture of spine and fracture of peivic bone”wi’th:’-oizint
injury to abdomen. He was discharged on
was again admitted on O7–10-2006…for itiswf’
physical condition. On such exam:i’inati.ofn”:dofcto’rs.’:fo.u
ache and pain in the pei\}ic:””~.area,”‘difficgufty”‘:..j’n”‘bending’V
forward and difficulty__movemeVn’ts,”~.._.He fwa-s..,,wa7Eking with
iimp, tenderness prese’ri-§V:i”,T.i,S. 60% (L) GQO/o,
movements of =sp1ne,”paiinfu|V” aindf.i’ie.fi’finds difficulty in
squatting a.n.d§’–.c:ro§ss_-_~iegtsi_tting…y C i
‘ _ ‘_AC)’r.j’._–th.,i.s?.basis’«..,d_octor assessed the disabiiity of
whoie at circumstance, the amount
awardedgg head’ pain and sufferings in a sum of
. ~.i_s lower side and it is enhanced to
Towards medical expenses a sum of
Rs.*1__O,QO0′.[‘«€fis awarded, but there is no award towards
3′”*’~.__V”-incidentait’ expenses. Hence, confirming the award towards
expenses I award Rs.5,000/- towards incidental
_,_expenses Eike conveyance and attendant charges. Towards
physical disability of 60% of the left portion of the SLRT (L)
W
K
and (R) and 30% of whole body, it will be just to award him
a sum of Rs.35,BOO/- under the head loss of amenities.
8. Towards loss of earning during the__perio’d..’._oiF rest
and treatment, he has to be compensated,._u_:T.he’-l.:ciaima’n~t..’fi’*~._x
claims to be a manual labour earningg_l?§s.j3,aQ'{j[+–..p’e»r-month.
Accident occurred in the,,’_yeari”*._1″999,
exaggeration. Hence, his income:i’s takeln-a’,:s:F{:s.§,,0O0/«. {is
could be seen from thezdiiatulflellloi ‘andvtreatment, he
could not have Vworkedwgm-o*ntiis;Vv»..’–V”Accordingly, an
amount of is loss of earning
during laid up »
9*’.-._ * Vfuture income, based on 30%
physical disiabilvitylto At.he’«inihole body the claimant has to be
comife-nslate_d. lAS’inc.e._..’he had an income of Rs.3,000/~ per
month loss :ovfjfu.ture income could be calculated on the basis
nl=so~°/0, iéi;’,n;19;IsL’9oo/–, annually it will be Rs.10,800/~–. The
claimantnarvas aged 35 years and the multiplier applicable is
“..ff_’|.AE:3.’ll”«..,Therefore, under this head he is entitled to loss of
r rorulré income of Rs.1,72,800/-.
10. In the result, the award is modified as follows:
wax